Good point . . .
danimal posted this yesterday:
I have to second a comment posted over at Drunk Cyclist: what the F**K do people have to do to warrant a maximum sentence? She was a.) a repeat offender, b.) demonstrably unremorseful for her actions, c.) failing to take responsibility for her actions, d.) egregious in the crime (it wasn’t even close to “missing” the cyclist.) What circumstance can you dream up that is more heinous that does not warrent a murder 2 charge? Anything worse that you are thinking right now (intent, etc) gets murder. Am I wrong here?
I stated earlier that I thought the 10 1/2 year sentence seemed “about right” but I have to agree–is there anything at all mitigating about Arrington’s actions? If driving drunk on a suspended license and hitting and killing a man in this manner, and then laughing about it is not enough to get you the maximum sentence, what would be?
–Erik Ryberg
January 25th, 2008 at 1:26 pm
“If driving drunk on a suspended license and hitting and killing a man in this manner, and then laughing about it is not enough to get you the maximum sentence, what would be?”
Hitting a kid?
January 25th, 2008 at 3:29 pm
Killing a whole family?
January 26th, 2008 at 9:34 pm
Killing somebody other than a lone cyclist.
I bet if she would have murdered a popular Realtor putting up their sign, a child of a nice middle class white family, or a police officer doing a traffic stop, she would have seen the maximum.